School of Psychology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Department of Neuroscience, Psychology and Behaviour, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2022 Jan;75(1):30-42. doi: 10.1177/17470218211032043. Epub 2021 Jul 18.
Proponents of good-enough processing suggest that readers often (mis)interpret certain sentences using fast-and-frugal heuristics, such that for non-canonical sentences (e.g., ) people confuse the thematic roles of the nouns. We tested this theory by examining the effect of sentence canonicality on the reading of a follow-up sentence. In a self-paced reading study, 60 young and 60 older adults read an implausible sentence in either canonical (e.g., ) or non-canonical form (e.g., ), followed by a sentence that was implausible given a good-enough misinterpretation of the first sentence (e.g., ) or a sentence that was implausible given a correct interpretation of the first sentence (e.g., ). We hypothesised that if non-canonical sentences are systematically misinterpreted, then sentence canonicality would differentially affect the reading of the two different follow-up types. Our data suggested that participants derived the same interpretations for canonical and non-canonical sentences, with no modulating effect of age group. Our findings suggest that readers do not derive an incorrect interpretation of non-canonical sentences during initial parsing, consistent with theories of misinterpretation effects that instead attribute these effects to post-interpretative processes.
好的加工支持者认为，读者经常（错误）地使用快速和节俭的启发式来解释某些句子，以至于对于非规范句子（例如），人们会混淆名词的主题角色。我们通过检查句子规范程度对后续句子阅读的影响来检验这一理论。在一项自定步速阅读研究中，60 名年轻成年人和 60 名老年成年人阅读了一个不太可能的句子，该句子的形式为规范形式（例如）或非规范形式（例如），然后阅读一个基于对第一个句子的好的解释的不太可能的句子（例如）或一个基于对第一个句子的正确解释的不太可能的句子（例如）。我们假设，如果非规范句子被系统地误解，那么句子规范程度将对两种不同的后续类型的阅读产生不同的影响。我们的数据表明，参与者对规范句子和非规范句子得出了相同的解释，年龄组没有调节作用。我们的研究结果表明，读者在初始解析过程中不会对非规范句子产生不正确的解释，这与误解效应理论一致，该理论将这些效应归因于解释后的过程。
